5 Court Cases that Could Change the Future of LGBT Rights
There are major court cases that are currently unfolding that could prove monumental in the LGBT community. If these cases are decided against LGBT people then this has the potential to systematically dismantle the only few rights that LGBT people already have.
Pidgeon v. Turner: LGBT opponents have been continually arguing that same-sex couples should not be allowed to get married and also shouldn't be entitled to the same benefits as people in opposite-sex marriages. Should this case make it back to the US Supreme Court, we could see a ruling that allows states to limit or completely remove all benefits that same-sex couples are entitled to.
Doe v. Trump, Karnoski v. Trump, Stockman v. Trump: The President's tweets about transgender military service were all extremely discriminatory and were based on no evidence. Trump has attempted to implement a "transgender troop ban" which has been blocked by multiple federal courts but this still has the potential to decide which people are "ready for the military".
Arlene's Flowers Inc. v. Washington: A Colorado baker denied making a cake to a same-sex couple on religious grounds. It was decided that these were "narrow, and unusual grounds," without "reaching the deeper issues underneath." They ultimately decided in a 7-2 decision by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission that the baker's beliefs were "irrational."
EEOC v. R.G. & G.R Harris Funeral Homes: The US Congress still has not added the categories of "sexual orientation" or "gender identity" to the federal civil rights legislation. There are fewer than half of all of the states that have added similar terms to their own state anti-discrimination laws. LGBT advocates are arguing that the ban on sex discrimination in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 includes LGBT people.
Doe v. Boyertown Area School District: The Trump administration withdrew the Obama-era guidance protecting transgender students. Litigation from both the anti-transgender side and transgender rights groups is rapidly bringing the issue to a head.
Pidgeon v. Turner: LGBT opponents have been continually arguing that same-sex couples should not be allowed to get married and also shouldn't be entitled to the same benefits as people in opposite-sex marriages. Should this case make it back to the US Supreme Court, we could see a ruling that allows states to limit or completely remove all benefits that same-sex couples are entitled to.
Doe v. Trump, Karnoski v. Trump, Stockman v. Trump: The President's tweets about transgender military service were all extremely discriminatory and were based on no evidence. Trump has attempted to implement a "transgender troop ban" which has been blocked by multiple federal courts but this still has the potential to decide which people are "ready for the military".
Arlene's Flowers Inc. v. Washington: A Colorado baker denied making a cake to a same-sex couple on religious grounds. It was decided that these were "narrow, and unusual grounds," without "reaching the deeper issues underneath." They ultimately decided in a 7-2 decision by the Colorado Civil Rights Commission that the baker's beliefs were "irrational."
EEOC v. R.G. & G.R Harris Funeral Homes: The US Congress still has not added the categories of "sexual orientation" or "gender identity" to the federal civil rights legislation. There are fewer than half of all of the states that have added similar terms to their own state anti-discrimination laws. LGBT advocates are arguing that the ban on sex discrimination in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 includes LGBT people.
Doe v. Boyertown Area School District: The Trump administration withdrew the Obama-era guidance protecting transgender students. Litigation from both the anti-transgender side and transgender rights groups is rapidly bringing the issue to a head.
Comments
Post a Comment